2K challenge week 51

[DUThomas]

Targets so far (correct me if i'm wrong):

Gerhard 7:15
Tom 7:15
David 7:10
Andy 7:30

Time to place your bets!

Unfortunately, I had actually said sub-7, but I'm going to reassess after my delayed 10K.

Gerhard, that's a terrific 1K time! I think you're the one who should have the sub-7 target!

I'm back from several days of lazing on a beach and no rowing whatsoever -- looking forward to getting back to it!

[Gerhard]

workouts

Saturday 3-11
5K, starting at PB-pace of 1:59. Kept the pace for 3K, eased down and finished in 20.30. I like my new pacing strategy for medium / longer rows: stay around PB pace until halfway, then pick a comfortable pace to finish the piece. Pick up the pace again if and when I feel ike it.

Monday 5-11
10K on rowpro with Jeroen. Started at PB pace 2:03 and kept it up for 5K, eased down and finished just under 43.00.

Wednesday 7-11
3x2K on rowpro. The other guys where rowing around 6:40. I was happy to complete the first two intervals in 7:47 and 7:50. Had a complete meltdown after about 1000 into the third interval and finished in 8:15.

Averaged a little over 1:59 for the session, which is worse than last week BUT I started out a lot faster AND recovery was less than last week.

[Gerhard]

Tonight I plan to do a 1000 R10 / 800 R8 / 600 R6 / 400 R4 /200 downhill interval, with plenty of rest. I'll start each interval at 1:44 and see how far I get on that pace. I think I need to do more speed-intervals to gain speed-endurance and delay lactate build up.

Why am i posting this? Probably just to prevent me from finding excuses to skip the workout

[andyb2004]

Why am i posting this? Probably just to prevent me from finding excuses to skip the workout

I agree - telling everyone you are going to do something is a great way to see it through - good luck

Update from me - I've been doing the workouts, but they have not gone so well in the past week or so. I'm really struggling to keep going at anything more than easy pace in the mornings. I will try to get to the gym tomorrow night and set myself a tougher goal... I need a little 'success' to help my confidence.

David, Gerhard; when are you doing the 10k again?

[DUThomas]

David, Gerhard; when are you doing the 10k again?

You remembered! How thoughtful!

I'm going to do mine this weekend and, in case of failure, I'll try again on Tuesday or Wednesday. If I still can't break 39, I'll save it for a future goal.

After being sick and on vacation, I've really struggled -- more mentally than physically -- to get back into rowing. Today, I rowed 10K continuously (in 40:28), which marks the first time in weeks that I've managed to rowed more than about 3K continuously. So I hope that's it for my lull.

[andyb2004]

You remembered! How thoughtful!

I mentioned it because I might also have another go at it tomorrow night ... Maybe I can loose those 2.9 seconds.

[Gerhard]

After being sick and on vacation, I've really struggled -- more mentally than physically -- to get back into rowing. Today, I rowed 10K continuously (in 40:28)which marks the first time in weeks that I've managed to rowed more than about 3K continuously.

Hey that's MY target!! Can I borrow your 40:28? I'll give you a fast 1000 in return... .

During my last 10K's I've been struggling to keep 2:03 until 5K, and eased down to finish the row. I'll try to break 41 minutes sometime this weekend. I know that the target is 40:30, but it's a step in the right direction and it might boost my long distance confidence. I need a good row to prove that I'm actually ABLE to do 40:30, because at the moment I have serious doubts.

[DUThomas]

I'll give you a fast 1000 in return... .

Deal!

We're not quite on the same point of the strength-endurance continuum. I can't imagine matching your PBs in the 500m and 1K (at least, not yet ... ).

[Gerhard]

I changed my plans for last nights row and did a 60 minute row instead of the planned interval session.

I got to 14110 meters, PB increase of exacly 200 meters. That made me happy .

The dragfactor for this session was 110 instead of the usual 128 and it felt a lot easier this time. My HR drift was less than usual, average heartrate was under 170 and I never felt that I had to work 'really hard' (I got tired, but in a different way). Normally, during the second half of long rows, I have to work for (and am very conscious of) every single stroke and lose rhytm completely.

I used to do all my rows at drag 128, but lately I increased the drag for short rows (150 for 500m, 140 for 1000m). That has improved my performance for short distances considerably (I've tested 250 meters on various dragfactors - it DOES make a difference).

Now it seems that lower drag suits me better for longer distances. That implies that there could be something like an optimal (personal) dragfactor per distance / stroke rate / pace. That confuses me , because the general consensus seems to be that the dragfactor is a matter of personal preference and not a major factor to optimize performance. I believe most people use the same dragfactor for all / most distances.

So a new question arises: Should I try to determine optimal dragfactors and if so, how? Based on SPI? Strokerate? Pace? A combination of these three?

I'm lost

[johnlvs2run]

The drag factor is related to the speed of the fan.

A 110 drag factor at 2:04 pace is equivalent to a 150 drag factor at 1:31 pace.

110 x 2:04/1:31 = 150

This being said, I got a 500m SB at 81 drag factor a few days ago.

A high drag factor helps you to accelerate more quickly at max speed but after 500 meters doesn't make all that much difference. I feel the lower drag factors take less energy to maintain.

[Nosmo]

I think you'll find that over time as your strength and technique improve, the drag factor will make less of a difference. There are so many more important things to training then the specific drag factor. If you are focused on getting the fastest time at every distance then a higher drag factor for shorter distances and a lower one for longer will help some. If you are focused on 2K or 5K time or are an on the water rower, then settling of one drag factor makes more sense. Generally the drag factor should increase with strength and weight of the rower-- in a boat the heavier the person the more drag there is. A lightweigt women would generally use something like 100-110, a lightweight man or heavy weight woman maybe use 125, and a heavy weight male something like 150. If you 6'6' and 280 lbs going for 500m then perhaps a drag factor of 200 would be best.
Most coaches recommend settling on one drag factor and leaving it there for consistency. Of course most coaches are only interested in 2K and 6K times and are on the water coaches. Rarely will you find someone who adjusts the load in a boat because of a head wind--and a strong head wind is equivelent to a fairly significant change in load (a very rough guess based on my experience, a decent tail wind vs a decent head wind is like changing from 105 to 135.)

[DUThomas]

A 110 drag factor at 2:04 pace is equivalent to a 150 drag factor at 1:31 pace.

I'm confused. How are those two equivalent? In the speed of the fan? Not in effort, certainly.

[johnlvs2run]

You don't need to accelerate the fan as much at a 2:04 pace as at 1:31 pace.

The drag factors are equivalent to the paces.

However, in my opinion the drag factors given are too high for those speeds.

A drag factor of 120 is quite sufficient for a pace of 1:31.

[Nosmo]

A 110 drag factor at 2:04 pace is equivalent to a 150 drag factor at 1:31 pace.

I'm confused. How are those two equivalent? In the speed of the fan? Not in effort, certainly.

I'm not sure what John means, but for a given flywheel speed the power is proportional to the drag factor. See: http://www-atm.physics.ox.ac.uk/rowing/ ... meter.html

So if you increase the drag factor from 110 to 150 and row with exactly the same average flywheel speed, then your power would increase by 150/110 = 1.36 times, or you speed would increase by the cube root of this: 1.11, so the pace would change from 2:04 to 1:52.

Note: if you have the same stroke length with both drag factors and the same drive speed, the flywheel will slow down more on the recovery with the higher drag factor, so if the recovery takes the same amount of time, a bigger drag factor will feel less then 1.36 times as heavy at the catch.

The following may be not very clear or confusing. Inwhich case skip it, and read the link above.
Also note that the erg really measures the drag factor, and then calculates the power from the time and number of rotations per stroke, the time and power give it a speed and distance. As you may know a constant speed requires the least power for a given average speed. This also applies to an individual stroke. So a higher drag factor actually requires more power (during the drive) for the same speed because the flywheel will change speed more. However it requires less handle speed and less strokes per minute both of which save energy. One needs to find the proper trade off between these factors. But there is really a decent range where most people can be quite efficient.

Generally rowers have optimized these factors for a boat. People in boats mostly converge around a standard amount of leverage. Interestingly enough, this is not very strongly influenced by the size and strength of the rower. This means in practice, the "drag factor" that people tend to row with is more or less proportional to the mass of the rower (in a given boat). The numbers I gave above roughly correspond to the drag one will feel in a good racing boat.

[DUThomas]

I got to 14110 meters, PB increase of exacly 200 meters. That made me happy .

Congratulations on your PB! Nice row!